• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

why do you need a machine to clean records?

vacuum power test

Ok, ive been keeping up with this thread, and i decided to test. I took Willie Nelson, The Troublemaker, which I had already cleaned with solution and a brush then towel dried. I have been listening to this beautiful Masterpiece so I had a good reference. I took this album and cleaned with solution, brush, water rinse, then used a crevice attachment with velvet ribbon and vacuumed it thourouly while spinning by hand on a turntable, The results were speactacular. The vacuumed record has much more detail than before, much clearer. There is an obvious difference. I will begin my search for a rcm, in the meantime i will use my new attachment..

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • velvet vacuum attachment.jpg
    velvet vacuum attachment.jpg
    54.1 KB · Views: 116
Last edited:
Of all the people who have a vacuum RCM and have chimed in on the topic in this forum, I remember only one person who didn't agree they clean more effectively than any other method they had tried. It's the most uniformly agreed upon topic I think I've ever seen...not just in this forum, but anywhere.
 
Bob_in_OKC said:
Of all the people who have a vacuum RCM and have chimed in on the topic in this forum, I remember only one person who didn't agree they clean more effectively than any other method they had tried. It's the most uniformly agreed upon topic I think I've ever seen...not just in this forum, but anywhere.
Click to expand...

This is true. Typically, the only folk who pooh-pooh the idea of vacuum stage RCMs are people who have not tried a vacuum stage RCM. It's not easy to come to terms shelling out big bucks for a rudimentary motor and wet vac in a box, isn't exciting (to most, at least), isn't glamorous as a new TT or cartridge.

I really didn't want to fork out the $350 for a used RCM, didn't want this black box taking up space in my house. I can't say a vinyl covered RCM is attractive to me.

But it did make a difference.


That said, it's not a cheap item (unless you build it yourself- but that's also an investment of your time, which has value too).

And plenty of people have lived for decades with their records never owning a cleaner.

So, for some, a RCM isn't a priority. And maybe not even needed.

But, for the really serious and dedicated vinyl lover, and to get the absolute most out of your system, I strongly feel a RCM with vacuum stage is a priority and necessity.
 
RCMs suck!

thedelihaus said:
But, for the really serious and dedicated vinyl lover, and to get the absolute most out of your system, I strongly feel a RCM with vacuum stage is a priority and necessity.
Click to expand...

:yes: I've had a Nitty Gritty Record Doctor and currently use a VPI 16.5.

Both represent the best audio purchases I've ever made, by far. :music:

The KAB solution should put to rest the resistance on the basis of cost - I think all the vacuum based RCMs are effective and worthwhile/critical to getting the most from used records.
 
Last edited:
soundtroll said:
<snip>... I disagree that detritus loaded H2o sucked away from the surface works better than detritus soaked H2O washed away by more clean H20.
Click to expand...
This makes perfect sense to me. I built a contraption similar to the Gem Dandy and use it to rinse away various cleaning agents along with the dirt they loosened. By the time the record reaches the vacuum stage there's nothing on it but pure, clean distilled water. No chance of cross contamination and no risk of anything being left behind by a weak or uneven vacuum.
 
I'm busy inventing my own machine.

So far it's pretty remarkable with garage sale records.
 

Attachments

  • Picture-772.jpg
    Picture-772.jpg
    61 KB · Views: 1,286
  • Picture-774.jpg
    Picture-774.jpg
    58.4 KB · Views: 1,275
I have gotten a lot of flack for insisting on measuring things, but here's the same disk after sink washing and after washing with my contraption. there's room for improvement, but a lot of big spikes are gone.
 

Attachments

  • noise-1.jpg
    noise-1.jpg
    70 KB · Views: 30
soundtroll said:
like I said in my last post...but I disagree that detritus loaded H2o sucked away from the surface works better than detritus soaked H2O washed away by more clean H20.
Click to expand...

I missed this earlier.

You may disagree, and that is your right, but you haven't tried an RCM, neither with nor without a vacuum stage. Correct?

So you are, essentially, basing your disbelief in a vacuum stage RCM on an assumption and/or personal bias- yes?


Where is Joplin located? There must be an AKer with an RCM close by you could try.


This way, instead of speculation and assumptions to base your opinion on you could have a real hands-on, tangible experience as your basis to make your claims, and can then draw your final conclusion from there.

If you were closer, I'd let you try out my RCM.:thmbsp:

I think it's the only way you'll be able to see if it's worth the investment to you, or if your hand wash method is perfectly satisfactory to suit your needs and purpose.:yes:
 
JBL GUY said:
That is a clever design. I like it.
Click to expand...

Thank you. It's a rough prototype I did in about an hour, after thinking about it overnight. I'm still wondering about what fabric to use. the prototype used really cheap microfiber, and I'm going to get some 3M stuff in various grades of fineness. One of the strengths of the design is that it lends itself to DIY experimenting.

I'm probably going to glue the record drop mechanism out of the way. I've decided, however, that the automatic spindle is more useful than a manual spindle. And old players are readily available.

If you do several records in a row, the sock stays damp, and you can't play the disk right away. But on the plus side you can apply several rounds of cleaning fluids while vacuuming, since the spindle holds the sucker (or you can position it with one hand while brushing with the other).

I've been using the 80/20 water/alcohol solution, using distilled water, with a drop of Dawn. It would be easy to have a bowl of cleaner and a bowl of pure rinse water available. You can slather the cleaner on pretty heavy, since it will be sucked off immediately, with no danger to the label.

I use the same microfiber to apply the cleaner, applying pressure with my fingers. Dip and clean. I can pay special attention to known bad areas of the record. I've thought of using a paint brush, and folks on the other cleaner thread seem to think that's a good idea.

Patent applied for.:D

If it looks like a keeper, I'll call it the AK-42®, the Answer to clicks, pops and everything.
 
Last edited:
Where is Joplin located? There must be an AKer with an RCM close by you could try.


This way, instead of speculation and assumptions to base your opinion on you could have a real hands-on, tangible experience as your basis to make your claims, and can then draw your final conclusion from there.

If you were closer, I'd let you try out my RCM.:thmbsp:

Thanks for the invite. I have plenty of records I can Aside/Bside sometime by just vacuuming after the wash stage.

I know a couple of local AKers but not with RCMs.
 
js1138 said:
I'm still wondering about what fabric to use. the prototype used really cheap microfiber, and I'm going to get some 3M stuff in various grades of fineness.
Click to expand...
I use the open nylon mesh from a laundry bag on mine. It doesn't impede vacuum flow, generates less static and hardly absorbs any moisture.

Record must be clean first though as any grit may scratch (see my post (#85) above for my preferred cleaning method).
 
Last edited:
Note: I tried to do a partial quote in the last post. I don't know why it didn't come up in the box. Not expert with the platform yet.
 
I bought my first RCM, a Nitty Gritty, back in 1990 out of pure necessity because I was buying so many used records as people were dumping their LP collections in favor of CD at the time. Most of the records I bought were anywhere between $0.50 to $1.99 and many of them were dusty/dirty and needed a good cleaning.

For me to have handwashed all of them would have been an exercise in patience and a severe case of dishwash hands. I forget how much I paid for the Nitty Gritty back then but it was less than $200 for sure and it was the best money I spent for the LP side of things. It was easy to justify spending the money because I was saving so much money on used LP's but after I got it and used it, the justification was even furthered by the sound.

kirk57 said:
You've missed the sole reason I (and many others I suspect) shelled out the money for an RCM: It cleans records more effectively than any other method. My Nitty Gritty was probably the best audio-related purchase I've ever made. The 'impressive' bit is funny, as nobody I know even knows what it is, or cares.

It's always fun to see people change their minds on this after they actually get one.
Click to expand...
 
soundtroll said:
...Thanks for the invite. I have plenty of records I can Aside/Bside sometime by just vacuuming after the wash stage.

I know a couple of local AKers but not with RCMs.
Click to expand...

If you're ever in boston, I'm glad to lend a hand. Just let me know.:thmbsp:
 
ripblade said:
I use the open nylon mesh from a laundry bag on mine. It doesn't impede vacuum flow, generates less static and hardly absorbs any moisture.

Record must be clean first though as any grit may scratch (see my post (#85) above for my preferred cleaning method).
Click to expand...

I've improved my microfiber sock by poking holes in it with an Exacto knife to increase air flow. I have a nylon bristle brush left over from decades ago. I tried it on a GS record that had a scratch that made the record skip. I held the bristles against the motion of the record. Now the skip is completely gone, and the ticks are way down in the music.

I've done a dozen unplayable records now, and on most, the crackle is at a point where I suspect it is distortion from record wear. On the worst ones, a few pops remain. These might be damage rather than dirt.

I tried a hand held wand before making the one that fits over the spindle. I think the spindle version is ten times easier to use, and requires nothing but a Dremel and a reinforced cutting disk. I don't know exactly what the best drill bit is to make the spindle hole, but I used a 1/4 inch bit and wobbled it in the holes until it fit. Next version will be better looking.

My "machine" cost under five dollars for the 1/2 inch tubing and the fittings. the microfiber adds a few dollars. It doesn't yet have a good vacuum cleaner coupler, so I used tape. I'm using a little Orek that I got at a thrift store, but a small Shop Vac cost $30 new. It doesn't such enough water to worry about. Most of it will quickly evaporate. I guess if you set up a cleaning assembly line, a shop vac would be safer.

I'm going to claim that when I solve the minor problems of making the best sock and getting the vacuum coupling to look nice, my device will be the equal in performance and convenience of anything out there at any price.

I can clean the dirtiest, grungiest record in one step, without a trip to the sink, and without risking the label. I can use any cleaning solution and can rinse with distilled water if I choose. If the record has actual visible grit, I put it on the TT and lift the grit off with a damp microfiber cloth before installing the vacuum wand.

The socks are trivial to make, and cheap. I can change them and replace them if they get dirty or too wet to use. I think that's a better idea than having a fixed pad that can't easily or cheaply be replaced.
 
Here's Mark III of my wand. The slits are wider, and the spindle hole is much closer to the ideal size. (It's upside down, of course.) Took about Half an hour to make, including sanding for beauty.:D

I super glued the record drop mechanism so It wouldn't impede installation of the wand. So long automatic mode, BSR.:yes:

I believe nylon bristle brushes are available, but the cool thing is you can use any brush that you think is best. And you can brush and vacuum at the same time.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1117.jpg
    IMG_1117.jpg
    35.5 KB · Views: 1,350
js1138 said:
Here's Mark III of my wand. The slits are wider, and the spindle hole is much closer to the ideal size. (It's upside down, of course.) Took about Half an hour to make, including sanding for beauty.:D

I super glued the record drop mechanism so It wouldn't impede installation of the wand. So long automatic mode, BSR.:yes:

I believe nylon bristle brushes are available, but the cool thing is you can use any brush that you think is best. And you can brush and vacuum at the same time.

attachment.php
Click to expand...

You could buy some velour and cut it to size, gluing it to the wand so that there's an opening/slit for all the crude to go into the wand instead of getting sucked into the padding you're using. Pretty ingenious. One thing on the nitty gritty I use, the record gets pressed pretty firmly against the vacuum slit leaving very little air leakage-maybe there's an added attachement to push the wand down on yours that slips over the top. Or you could use your hands I guess but what fun would that be?
 
Question directed at RCM devotees: How would using a spin clean followed up by a good vacuuming compare with a vpi or

Thanks
 
the record gets pressed pretty firmly against the vacuum slit leaving very little air leakage
Click to expand...

Air leakage is necessary, because what moves the water is not the vacuum, but the movement of air. The air has to come from somewhere -- through the fabric or something. It wouldn't be difficult to glue some velour along the slits to improve suction, but the fabric needs to be porous somewhere. With two pickups, it might be interesting to have the first pick up some of the crud in the fabric and the second complete the vacuuming. I like the idea of throwaway fabric,

I've found I don't have to sew the socks. I can just cut 3"x5" pieces, wrap them around the wand and hold them in place with office clips. The weight of the clips is about right to hold the wand against the record.

Anyway, the whole thing is so ridiculously easy and cheap that I can experiment with all kinds of configurations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom